While Trump may claim this isn't about religion, it clearly is. That makes this executive order a violation of the establishment clause. Plus the fact that entire nations are banned makes it a violation of the equal protection clause. More stringent security requirements for certain nations may be justifiable. However, Trump's use of executive authority is not based on what keeps us safe, it's arbitrary. Otherwise Saudi Arabian travelers would've been banned. This means that the basis of his executive order is based upon discrimination and not security.

Because Trump is stupid.

Conclusion of 9th district as by itself is evidence against the ban. And you are more likely to be killed by toddler than terrorist. So let's get rid of all toddlers. It is pretty logical, isn't it, in Trumpverse of course. I congratulate Americans for electing the last president of U.S..

I think they can lift the ban on green card holders.

ACLU may succeed in lifting the travel ban on green card holders but the rest of the ban will stand up in court. Trump followed a law that was already in place and as I understand it, the President has the right to implement immigration policy. A travel ban is a part of immigration policy so I don't see how the ACLU with its millions can strike the ban down.

Conflicted on results

My desire for them to win, and actually winning is another story. I personally believe they have good grounds to do so.While Trump may claim this isn't about religion, it clearly is. Today he then signs religious protections . He makes zero sense and somehow I think he believe the american public are too ignorant to understand what he doing and can't see past his veil of BS lies and cover ups.

Yes, but money does not equal a legal defense.

The amount of money the ACLU has managed to accrue in recent days is substantial and will likely fund several successful efforts to circumvent Trump's executive order. However, they still have a serious legal battle ahead of them because they have to prove each case is a violation of some law (or the constitution).

They very easily could but they don't have the guts

Section 5 (e) I believe it was says it all. Religious minorities under religious persecution may appeal to the government for an exception if under attack for a religious cause. The act of imposing a rule for religion may be debated to break the establishment clause however what nobody else seems to have noticed (as far as I've talked about the situation) That this would allow any faith group in Muslim majority nations to appeal and be accepted for immigration but would bar Muslims. Other than this the ACLU doesn't have the guts to stand up to the president...

There is a method to his madness

This is a stunt Trump is using to show America that the supreme court is not on our side.The plan is to keep out terrorists . It involves treating people differently because of the religion in their country. For this reason the court will think this act is outrageous, because they are a bunch of liberal peckerheads.It is quite possible that someone from one of those countries will enter the U.S. as a tourist, but they are actually a radical jihadist on a mission to kill some American infidel, and after that Trump can say I told you so, and he wouldn't have been able to get in to the U.S. If Trump's security measures were in effect.

There is a method to his madness

This is a stunt Trump is using to show America that the supreme court is not on our side.The plan is to keep out terrorists . It involves treating people differently because of the religion in their country. For this reason the court will think this act is outrageous, because they are a bunch of liberal peckerheads.It is quite possible that someone from one of those countries will enter the U.S. as a tourist, but they are actually a radical jihadist on a mission to kill some American infidel, and after that Trump can say I told you so, and he wouldn't have been able to get in to the U.S. If Trump's security measures were in effect.

Yes, I think so.

would the ACLU tolerate a comment deceitfully posted under the name "Donald Trump," in which the President purportedly confessed, in an utterly deadpan tone, that his plan didn't quite go the way he was hoping it would, because even though he tried to conceal that it was directed against Muslims, too many people drew the right conclusion anyway?

I dont care about this shit

While Trump may claim this isn't about religion, it clearly is. That makes this executive order a violation of the establishment clause. Plus the fact that entire nations are banned makes it a violation of the equal protection clause. More stringent security requirements for certain nations may be justifiable. However, Trump's use of executive authority is not based on what keeps us safe, it's arbitrary. Otherwise Saudi Arabian travelers would've been banned. This means that the basis of his executive order is based upon discrimination and not security.

No they don't

As much as I'd like to believe that someone could somehow take down Donald Trump and his new regime, I seriously doubt this is the case. This is especially true if we think that the ACLU are going to somehow be able to save the day. All you have to do to come to this conclusion is look back at their track record dealing with Reagan etc.

Ban countries that have incompatible cultures.

#1 it is Constitutional#2 we are morally obligated to do so for our self preservation#3 these people are rapists, every country that took in middle eastern migrants saw an increase in rape.#4 white people are a global minority and if they don't grow a backbone freedom, scientific innovation, and happiness will be replaced by violent religious overlords.

They are judicially, morally and logically wrong.

Judicially speaking, the president of the united states has a constitutional right to ban immigrants as he sees fit if the president thinks if the immigrants are morally detrimental to our society. This is a temporary ban until the Americans can figure out what exactly is wrong. Morally the ACLU is wrong because this is not good for the America because most of the immigrants coming into the America are not coming for it's values of freedom but for free stuff. That is wrong. Logically, first of all this is not a Muslim ban. An high-ranking official from Qatar had recently told us so. And this executive order does not include the Muslim majority nations of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Pakistan etc. By the way these countries were handpicked by none other than "Obama". Obama himself passed a executive order many times during his presidency to ban immigrants from these countries. They have no case and they are on the wrong side of everything.

Current US Law

US Code 1182 inadmissible aliens. This isn't even a debate. Even if it makes people mad, there is nothing wrong with a nation’s leaders adjusting its immigration policy, even its refugee policy, to reduce the prospect of harm to that nation, and to serve its own interests. Waste of money and time.

Aliens will lose.

Aliens do not have the protection of the US constitution.The constitution holds no jurisdiction over aliens. Only people residing as citizens of the united states have these protections. Trump is directly using a constitutional right of the president to ban the countries for 90 days until a vetting system can be put in place. ACLU can't stop the banning of visas. The courts have no authority to issue visas. ACLU just made a lot of money off of stupid people.

Trump is not doing anything unconstitutional

Obama created this refugee crisis but where were all of you when he gave millions to the middle east. Trump's travel ban is only temporary and if you want an example of why the travel ban exist, look at Sweden. This past Monday Feb. 20th there was a riot in Sweden caused by, you guessed it, refugees.

Trump is not doing anything unconstitutional

Obama created this refugee crisis but where were all of you when he gave millions to the middle east. Trump's travel ban is only temporary and if you want an example of why the travel ban exist, look at Sweden. This past Monday Feb. 20th there was a riot in Sweden caused by, you guessed it, refugees.

No Way Dude!

I like to think that the supreme court supports common sense and doing the "right" thing. The POTUS absolutely and unequivocally MUST be allowed to make these type of decisions AND it should be immediate for the sake of saving lives and the safety of the American people. The courts and especially the ACLU do not have the necessary information to accurately access these type of decisions and therefore, should keep out of it. If we have the ACLU making critical decisions like this, then America is completely _____'d!